Bibliographic record
Abstract
From the end of the Cold War to the terrorist attacks on the United States in September 2001, the NATO Alliance has changed profoundly. This book explores the multifaceted consequences of NATO's adjustment to new international and domestic political and security realities. Internal Alliance politics and matters of relative power within the membership have strongly influenced recent NATO developments. Several major issues challenging the Alliance are examined, including how the impact of efforts to develop an enhanced common European security and defense policy have affected NATO: whether missile defense is driving the United States and its European allies closer or further apart; how the experience of NATO in the Balkans and elsewhere brought alliance members together or made MATO cohesion more difficult to maintain; and in what way the changing role of NATO has influenced American and Canadian participation in the Alliance. An important guidepost to pivotal changes and likely NATO developments, scholars and policymakers of Atlantic and international politics will find these meditations indispensable. A number of authors also speculate on the likely changes for the alliance that will ensue in the wake of the September 11 terrorist attacks, and the possibility that NATO will soon modify its mission and responsibilities in reaction to the threat of international terrorism. Indeed many of the same strategies and strains that affected NATO cohesion over the past decade are likely to complicate efforts to maintain Alliance unity as part of the anti-terrorist coalition.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 0.004 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".